[Continued from Friday’s Part 9 and the preceding Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, and Part 8.] By: David A. Smith Friday’s Part 9 nearly completed our review of the public-policy implications of a Southbridge Towers privatization in the changing demographics now (slow income concentration) and after privatization […]

[Continued from yesterday’s Part 8 and the preceding Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, and Part 7.] By: David A. Smith If Southbridge Towers goes market, as its owners have voted more than 2-to-1 to do, the development’s cultural character will undoubtedly change gradually, and the effective affordability will […]

[Continued from yesterday’s Part 7 and the preceding Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, and Part 6.] By: David A. Smith In my continuing coverage of Southbridge Towers’ proposed conversion to a market-rate co-operative, enabling its owner-shareholder-renters to cash in on their apartments’ value, yesterday’s Part 7 addressed at length the question […]

[Continued from yesterday’s Part 6 and the preceding Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 5.] By: David A. Smith The end of yesterday’s Part 6 of our Southbridge Towers exhaustive review had concluded our assessment whether the money to be made, if made it will be, is a windfall or simply […]

[Continued from yesterday’s Part 5 and the preceding Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 and Part 4.] By: David A. Smith At the halfway point of our continuing saga of Southbridge Towers’ quest for market value to its occupants via the mechanism of Mitchell-Lama privatization, we’ve addressed six of the attributes that I submit people […]